One Apple iPhone owner has posted to YouTube a video shootout that pits an iPhone running on a 2.5G EDGE network against one rigged with 3G HSDPA access in a simulated speed test.

The mock 3G iPhone was connected via WiFi to an iMac whose internet connection was supplied with a HSDPA modem and then shared, while the traditional 2.5G iPhone was run on a standard overseas EDGE wireless network.

Based on the test results, which are largely theoretical given fluctuations in mobile wireless speeds from region to region and provider to provider, the 3G iPhone loaded the same web page as the 2.5G iPhone in nearly half the time.

One Apple iPhone owner has posted to YouTube a video shootout that pits an iPhone running on a 2.5G EDGE network against one rigged with 3G HSDPA access in a simulated speed test.

The mock 3G iPhone was connected via WiFi to an iMac whose internet connection was supplied with a HSDPA modem and then shared, while the traditional 2.5G iPhone was run on a standard overseas EDGE wireless network.

Based on the test results, which are largely theoretical given fluctuations in mobile wireless speeds from region to region and provider to provider, the 3G iPhone loaded the same web page as the 2.5G iPhone in nearly half the time.

Many things will be much faster - certainly things like youtube, email sending and receiving, song purchases over 3G and the like will benefit much more than web page loading. Plus web page loading will be better than this, because the 3G iphone will not have such a complicated "modem"

the speed difference is going to be small because the phones processor and memory also plays a role in displaying that page to you. the real noticeable difference with edge/3g will be when you tether your phone to your computer... which you can't do

One Apple iPhone owner has posted to YouTube a video shootout that pits an iPhone running on a 2.5G EDGE network against one rigged with 3G HSDPA access in a simulated speed test.

The mock 3G iPhone was connected via WiFi to an iMac whose internet connection was supplied with a HSDPA modem and then shared, while the traditional 2.5G iPhone was run on a standard overseas EDGE wireless network.

Based on the test results, which are largely theoretical given fluctuations in mobile wireless speeds from region to region and provider to provider, the 3G iPhone loaded the same web page as the 2.5G iPhone in nearly half the time.

The WiFi intermediary step kills some of the latency performance gains (isn't avg initial response for EDGE ~300ms vs ~80ms for 3G ?), but the test still shows us what we kind of knew: it's much faster.

the speed difference is going to be small because the phones processor and memory also plays a role in displaying that page to you. the real noticeable difference with edge/3g will be when you tether your phone to your computer... which you can't do

Yes, and in this video test, they used two iphones with the same processor and memory. The speed difference was a factor of 2.

I'll point and laugh at those who suggested the iPhone was fine without 3G.

The iPhone is fine without 3G. Most web pages are properly rendered and are usable on the iPhone regardless of speed (EDGE, 3G, Wi-Fi). Of course, faster is always better--unless you're talking something other than iPhone, like Windows Mobile, where it doesn't matter how fast the hardware is, the software is cr@p.

I had no Idea that 3G was faster than Edge. - Really when did this happen?

[testing out the broken Edit button workaround- pray for me - TB]

I think "how much faster, real-world" was the question ppl were curious about. So I'm glad whomever it was did the video, and that AI posted it.

Of course, it may not be a perfect test... as someone else noted, the WiFi intermediary step ups the latency a bit (but not too much, as WiFi is a low-latency tech usually). Real real-world (is that a new expression?), 3G is likely a bit faster than than what the test showed.

Not that it matters... once the 3G iPhone shows up in a month or two, nearly everyone is just gonna buy that, regardless of whether its 2x, 3x, 5x, whatever, faster than EDGE, real-world.

Unless the EDGE iPhone, assuming it's kept around, is priced insanely low. And even then, the 2.5G model would probably sell okay only in the US.

Of course, there's also WiMax, but its deployment in the US may get scaled back and slowed down, what with Sprint having a near-death experience currently. Their May 12 results are going to look like Pearl Harbor.

I think there'll probably be a high-storage 3G iPhone priced at that price level, but I'd be a bit surprised if there weren't a $399 3G iPhone as well. I'm also not sure why a 2.5G iPhone would be priced under the iPod Touch ($299) if they keep it around as the low-end iPhone.

Of course, if the 2.5G model gets discontinued, by all means, take advantage of any and all fire sales.

But if they keep it around, and at a $100 price delta, I think the 2.5G iPhone mostly sits on store shelves, lonely and remembering its glory days.

I think there'll probably be a high-storage 3G iPhone priced at that price level, but I'd be a bit surprised if there weren't a $399 3G iPhone as well. I'm also not sure why a 2.5G iPhone would be priced under the iPod Touch ($299) if they keep it around as the low-end iPhone.

Of course, if the 2.5G model gets discontinued, by all means, take advantage of any and all fire sales.

But if they keep it around, and at a $100 price delta, I think the 2.5G iPhone mostly sits on store shelves, lonely and remembering its glory days.

.

Okay, perhaps I over-reacted in hopes of a lower cost iPhone.
Let's say the the 2.5 iPhone drops to $299. Perhaps refurbished ones will be at $249 (same as when AT&T had them for a few days).

Wow you get wifi everywhere you get 3G? I sit at work - no wifi, perfect 3G, I sit on the bus to/from work, no wifi but again, perfect 3G. I visit my parents/friends/relatives. None have wifi but I get a 3G signal. So really, wifi is a bit of a bum compromise since it's so limited whereas 3G = nearly everywhere..

the speed difference is going to be small because the phones processor and memory also plays a role in displaying that page to you. the real noticeable difference with edge/3g will be when you tether your phone to your computer... which you can't do

I totally agree. Remember when windows and palm phones changed over to Sprint Broadband. I have had both on both versions of "High Speed" mobile internet and the difference is not so large that it would make me buy a new phone. Tethering with devices on any of the major services will not give you cable modem/FIOS type speeds, but will definitely be four to five times faster than dial up. I live in New York City so the access to the high speed networks is fairly good.

Wow you get wifi everywhere you get 3G? I sit at work - no wifi, perfect 3G, I sit on the bus to/from work, no wifi but again, perfect 3G. I visit my parents/friends/relatives. None have wifi but I get a 3G signal. So really, wifi is a bit of a bum compromise since it's so limited whereas 3G = nearly everywhere..

This compromise is all relative. I am an attorney and have two offices, both with wi-fi, I have wi-fi at home and now all of the courthouses I am in have free wi-fi, now AT&T will be giving free wi-fi access in Barnes & Noble and Starbucks, and there are the number of unsecured servers and free wi-fi in numerous other places. My access is much greater than someone in Omaha. But will 3G be widely available in that City? 3G will never be as fast as wi-fi as it is now and the foreseeable future.

3G will never be as fast as wi-fi as it is now and the foreseeable future.

Sorry, but that is clearly not true. 3G is faster that wifi in many many instances.

With wifi you are only sharing whatever bandwidth is available from the access point. If you have 10 people sharing 1MB of bandwidth then your wifi connection could theoretically be only 100k or less. You go to a busy Starbucks and how many people might there be online? And how much bandwidth does Starbucks have going back to the carrier? I presume they do not give all of their bandwidth to customers and would keep a proportion of it for their own internal use too?

Sorry, but that is clearly not true. 3G is faster that wifi in many many instances.

With wifi you are only sharing whatever bandwidth is available from the access point. If you have 10 people sharing 1MB of bandwidth then your wifi connection could theoretically be only 100k or less. You go to a busy Starbucks and how many people might there be online? And how much bandwidth does Starbucks have going back to the carrier? I presume they do not give all of their bandwidth to customers and would keep a proportion of it for their own internal use too?

Well if you want to reduce the available bandwidth to a straw, then yes, you can create a scenario where 3G will be faster. It would be even *faster* if they were only using a 56k modem on the back end too, but how silly do you want to get with this?

And, which measure are you using for 3G speed in this comparison? The theoretical 2Mbit/s fixed location rate? Alright, let's assume you end up with a *perfect* connection, and can utilize all of it at 100%. Let's assume 10 folks on a WAP as well. The pipe to the ISP needs to be a measly 20Mbit, or 2.5MB/s to saturate all 10 people's connections at the same time... which you have to admit is a pretty artificial scenario for most people's use.

For the vast majority of the use cases, WiFi will beat 3G in a head to head, although yes, you can craft specific instances where a 3G unit can beat a WiFi connection... but that doesn't really give any useful information, does it?

Mine is too. Though I want the option for 3G, the area I am now has faster EDGE than some 3G data rates I've read about.

i think to people assume because their device and carrier HW are capable of much higher speeds that they are going to be getting it. I sure hope AT&T has up their nationwide data rates and coverage. They either have, or I've been very lucky with my 3G notebook card.

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"

I like your hopefulness, but the Iphone 3g will be more like
8GB iPhone 2.5 = $299
16GB iPhone 3G= $499
32GB iPhone 3G = $599

AT&T will offer a "rebate discount" though for the new model, the 3g...

Because so many iPhones from the US are being shipped out of the country and unlocked, thus losing revenue for Apple, I think Apple will raise the price of the device by $200 (though still officially locked because they are bastards and under contract with AT&T) and then offer a $200 discountas you and the rumours suggestwhen you sign up for a contract with AT&T.

If the AT&T happens will it be automated via the iTunes signup for the iPhone or will it have to be done via an AT&T authorized reseller? The latter is what the rumours are hinting to, but I see no reason why this can't be set up within the iTunes portal when it connects to AT&T to authorized your SIM and puts you into a 2-year contract.

if I were Apple I'd have it offer options instead of mailed rebate. Like credit toward iTS or AT&T store as well as a mailed check back.

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"

This compromise is all relative. I am an attorney and have two offices, both with wi-fi, I have wi-fi at home and now all of the courthouses I am in have free wi-fi, now AT&T will be giving free wi-fi access in Barnes & Noble and Starbucks, and there are the number of unsecured servers and free wi-fi in numerous other places.

That's neat, but if you're on the move (on public transit, in a carpool, or heck, even walking down the street), WiFi isn't really a help. Limited range hotspots + not mobile = not good for ppl on the move. \

You do not seem to get the difference between having a 3G connection and being connected for 3g applications. Here goes. If the phone is in standby and connected via 3G, it means that there is a 3G network available for a 3G application, i.e. VoIP. This drains the battery no more than a 2.5G connection. However, once the application is used, and data is passed, there is a higher drain on the battery. How do I know this? I have a 3G phone, and use it daily, so I can see how 3G does and does not affect battery life.

These blanket "kill the battery" statements such as yours and others are misleading at best and false in the worst case.'

Before you start offering expert advice via Apple talking points, get a 3G phone and do some practical tests yourself.

Since WiFi was brought up, is there a site I can use that will allow me to open any other site within a frame as SSL (HTTPS)? While important sites offer this i don't necessarily want people knowing what non-encrypted data I'm looking at. For example, YouTube or MySpace pages.

What I'm picturing is going to site like http;//secure.google.com and then having a bar ner the top with place for a Google search or to input the direct link I want to go to. The top frame wouldn't change (except, perhaps, for site related ads) while the bottom one would be queried from the server unencrypted (as usual) and then sent to my unsecured access point encrypted.

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"

Mine is too. Though I want the option for 3G, the area I am now has faster EDGE than some 3G data rates I've read about.

i think to people assume because their device and carrier HW are capable of much higher speeds that they are going to be getting it. I sure hope AT&T has up their nationwide data rates and coverage. They either have, or I've been very lucky with my 3G notebook card.

Thank the telecom gods that I am not forced to use the somewhat crappy US networks. Maybe AT&T and the others will pull their collective heads out and take a gander across the water at the European and Japanese networks. Hell, even throw in the ME networks as well.

Thank the telecom gods that I am not forced to use the somewhat crappy US networks. Maybe AT&T and the others will pull their collective heads out and take a gander across the water at the European and Japanese networks. Hell, even throw in the ME networks as well.